Connect with us

Published

on

In a late night session in Rome, the COP16 biodiversity talks – which resumed this week after failing to reach consensus last year – adopted a finance roadmap that will work towards a 2030 deadline, pushing back a final decision on how to channel scarce funding to help countries protect nature.

Under the roadmap, countries will assess whether to create a new, independent global biodiversity fund to replace the existing one sitting with the Global Environment Facility (GEF). This issue caused a major row at last year’s COP16 in Cali, Colombia – and is set to resurface in future discussions.

In an emotional final plenary in Rome in the early hours of Friday, COP16 president Susana Muhammad, who is Colombia’s outgoing environment minister, said: “I announce officially that we have given legs, arms and muscle to the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework”.

That framework, agreed in 2022 in Canada, is a global agreement to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by protecting at least 30% of the planet’s land and seas by 2030 – but it remains unclear where the money will come from to pay for the efforts required.

“More than any other issue, the successful implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework will depend on whether the world meets its financing targets,” said Brian O’Donnell, director of advocacy group Campaign for Nature.

UK aid budget cuts threaten climate finance pledge to vulnerable nations, experts warn

Countries have agreed to mobilise $200 billion a year in finance for nature by 2030, including $30 billion from wealthy governments to poorer ones. The total for 2022 was around half that, official figures show.

Under the new finance roadmap agreed in Rome, by COP18 in 2028, countries committed to “identify and implement measures to enhance the global biodiversity finance to mobilize new and additional resources from all sources”.

A thorny issue on the horizon will be whether to expand the base of government contributors to include not only developed countries but also well-off emerging economies. That was also a major point of disagreement at last year’s COP29 climate summit in Baku.

At the COP16 talks in Rome, countries agreed to discuss the “opportunities for broadening the contributors base” by next year’s COP17.

“Quite simply, we have no chance of halting and reversing biodiversity loss without accelerating and exponentially increasing the delivery of finance to the areas most important for biodiversity,” said O’Donnell.

“This decision today lays out a roadmap. Now, it is up to leaders worldwide to prioritise urgent action for nature,” he added.

Funding gap

Finance has been one of the most contentious issues at the UN biodiversity negotiations. In Cali, countries failed to reach an agreement after clashing for two weeks over the issue. And funding was one of the key barriers holding back last decade’s Aichi targets to stop nature loss, which were largely unmet.

In this week’s three-day session in Rome, countries agreed to create two separate workstreams running until 2030: one focused on the “financial mechanism” to channel funds for biodiversity and another seeking to “improve the mobilization of finance from all sources”.

Experts estimate there is a $700-billion gap in funding for nature protection every year. To close this, countries agreed in 2022 to re-direct $500 billion now spent on subsidies that are harmful for nature, and to mobilise $200 billion from all available financial sources, including government budgets, the private sector, and multilateral development banks.

How COP16 2.0 can unlock business investment to properly fund nature

The new 2030 roadmap was criticised by some developing countries during the negotiations. “Biodiversity cannot wait for a bureaucratic process that lasts forever while the environmental crisis continues to get worse,” Bolivia’s delegate told a plenary on Wednesday.

Nonetheless the final finance agreement in Rome has broken a “longstanding policy deadlock”, said Jill Hepp, biodiversity funding lead at Conservation International. “Now that there is a path forward on how funding will flow, we all must take ambitious action to accomplish our collective goals,” she added in a statement.

New biodiversity fund?

Currently, international funds for nature protection flow through the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF), administered by the GEF under an interim arrangement that ends in 2030. The main point of discussion at the resumed COP16 talks was what to do after that date.

The GBFF has struggled to attract funding, raising just $383 million in pledges from 12 developed countries so far. The most vulnerable nations also say the money isn’t reaching them and have criticised the GEF’s bureaucracy, leading a call to make the fund independent.

Under the Rome roadmap, countries agreed to have a permanent fund – but still need to work out whether it will stay at the GEF or whether to create an entirely new one. Governments are set to take this decision by 2028 and, if they opt for a new fund, they will discuss its operationalisation at COP19 in 2030.

Divisions over the new financial mechanism dominated discussions in Rome, while little time was spent on deciding how to increase cash flows. The BRICS group of emerging economies and African countries led the push for a new fund, while the European Union advocated for keeping it at the GEF.

“We will need to have more assurances when we embark on decisions on new financial mechanisms… that we won’t feel abandoned in the future,” said Brazilian negotiator Maria Angélica Ikeda.

Reacting to the outcome in Rome, the GEF’s CEO Carlos Manuel Rodríguez welcomed the decision and added that the GEF has gone through “a series of reforms” to better serve countries. “The GEF has been listening carefully to parties and is committed to continued improvements in order to respond to their expectations and capacities needs,” Rodríguez said in a statement.

Greenpeace activists hold signs near an installation in front of the FAO headquarters of the United Nations during the UN Biodiversity Conference, in Rome, Italy, February 24, 2025. REUTERS/Yara Nardi

Earlier in the week, the secretariat of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) launched the separate Cali Fund, which was agreed at last year’s talks in Colombia and is meant to receive voluntary contributions from companies that use genetic material from biodiversity. This is common in sectors like the pharmaceutical, chemical and cosmetics industries.

The fund currently sits empty – but the UN said it is in conversations with potential donors, without revealing names due to commercial confidentiality. “The ball is now in the court of businesses around the world,” said Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, deputy executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme.

Biodiversity plans lag behind

In Rome, countries also adopted a monitoring framework for the global biodiversity pact, which includes a set of indicators for countries to track progress on their national biodiversity strategies and action plans, known as NBSAPs.

The indicators – which include, for example, the number of species at risk of extinction or land use change in Indigenous territories – will help assess the effectiveness of country plans. Yet those plans remain few and far between.

Just 47 countries have submitted NBSAPs, according to the CBD’s tracker. Despite a formal deadline of last year’s COP16, only a handful of nations have presented new plans since, with Austria being the sole country to unveil its plan at this week’s resumed session in Rome. Key so-called “megadiverse” countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Brazil have yet to submit their NBSAPs.

COP16 host Colombia reports 35% surge in deforestation

Experts note that a lack of funding is a major obstacle for poorer countries in developing the plans, which require long consultation processes, in particular with Indigenous communities.

This is especially the case in Africa, where almost all countries have national biodiversity targets – a looser format that requires less spending – but not full NBSAPs.

With the finance decision now adopted in Rome, Hepp of Conservation International urged countries to focus on implementing their goals to safeguard nature and “urgently moving funds to protect lands and seas that sustain all of us”. “We must not take our eye off the ball,” she added.

The post UN biodiversity talks agree finance roadmap, pushing decision on a new fund to 2030 appeared first on Climate Home News.

UN biodiversity talks agree finance roadmap, pushing decision on a new fund to 2030

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Georgia Hasn’t Had a Consumer Advocate for Electric Ratepayers for 18 Years

Published

on

A bill to restore the state’s consumer utilities counsel failed to move forward, meaning Georgia will remain one of only a handful of states without a statutory advocate representing ratepayers.

Eighteen years after Georgia eliminated its consumer utility advocate, the fight to bring the office back recently resurfaced at a Senate hearing.

Georgia Hasn’t Had a Consumer Advocate for Electric Ratepayers for 18 Years

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Wondering How to Talk About Climate Change? Take a Lesson from Bad Bunny

Published

on

Discussing climate change can make a difference. Focusing on the impacts in everyday life is a good place to start, experts say.

When Bad Bunny climbed onto broken power lines during his Super Bowl halftime show, millions of viewers saw a spectacle. Climate communicators saw a lesson in how to talk about climate change.

Wondering How to Talk About Climate Change? Take a Lesson from Bad Bunny

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Greenpeace response to escalating attacks on gas fields in Middle East

Published

on

Sydney, Thursday 19 March 2026 — In response to escalating attacks on gas fields in the Middle East, including Israeli strikes on Iran’s giant South Pars gas field and Iranian retaliations on gas fields in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, the following lines can be attributed to Solaye Snider, Campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific:

The targeting of gas fields across the Middle East is a perilous escalation that reinforces just how vulnerable our fossil-fuelled world really is.

Oil and gas have long been used as tools of power and coercion by authoritarian regimes. They cause climate chaos and environmental pollution and they drive conflict and war. The energy security of every nation still hooked on gas, including Australia, is under direct threat.

For countries that are reliant on gas imports, like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and South Korea, this crisis is just getting started. It can take months to restart a gas export facility once it is shut down, meaning the shockwaves of these strikes will be felt for a long time to come.

It is a gross and tragic injustice that while civilians are killed and lose their homes to this escalating violence, and families struggle with a tightening cost-of-living, gas giants like Woodside and Santos have seen their share prices surge on the prospect of windfall war profits. 

We must break this cycle. Transitioning to local renewable energy is the way to protect Australian households from the inherent volatility of fossil fuels like gas.

-ENDS-

Images available for download via the Greenpeace Media Library

Media contact: Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lkeller@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace response to escalating attacks on gas fields in Middle East

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com